In the summer of 2024, the US Space Force launched a campaign to prepare for potential conflicts by addressing critical gaps in its command and control (C2) architecture. This effort aims to ensure that the systems and processes military leaders rely on for tactical decision-making will function cohesively, as intended.
The service established a goal to thoroughly integrate four high-priority classified systems into this architecture by 2026 at the request of General Stephen Whiting, the head of US Space Command. The Space Systems Command, the procurement branch of the Space Force, is also in the process of devising a roadmap to incorporate future C2 systems in the coming years, according to Claire Leon, who oversees systems integration.
“It’s really about being ready for contested space by 2026 and having the people, processes, tools, doctrine—everything we need to be effective,” Leon said at the SSC Space Industry Days conference on October 23.
The Space Force refers to the network of classified systems and operations, known as mission flows or kill chains, that link together to respond to specific scenarios. For instance, if a Space Force or Missile Defense Agency system detects an anti-satellite missile approaching a US asset, the mission flow includes early-warning capabilities to detect the approaching weapon, data processing systems for its characterization, and decision-assessment tools to formulate a response.
The service has worked for years to close capability and process gaps within these flows but has faced challenges balancing and coordinating priorities among other Department of Defense and intelligence organizations. Individual capabilities have improved, but end-to-end testing has not integrated them.
Whiting has openly said that having reliable and operational C2 systems is a top priority for Space Command.
“Space C2 allows us to protect our space assets from threats we face now and to protect Joint Forces from adversary attacks using space assets,” he said in February 2024 to the Senate Armed Services Committee. “An increasingly dynamic space environment requires a resilient C2 architecture to synchronize space forces and effects for operations in the space domain, as well as support traditional terrestrial operations.”
Leon said that Whiting’s directive in the summer of 2024 instilled a new urgency within Space Force leadership to address the command’s most pressing needs at a faster pace. The Space Operations Command, the National Reconnaissance Office, and the Missile Defense Agency are among the organizations with which her team is collaborating.
During a briefing on October 24, Leon informed journalists that the service is progressing on this work and expressed confidence that the Space Force will have capabilities ready for Space Command by 2026. However, she noted that the service might need to redirect resources to meet the deadline and potentially delay other projects.
According to her, the biggest challenge has been obtaining clearances for personnel involved in this work.
“Many of the capabilities we’re talking about are at a higher classification level, and we still have bureaucracy tied to getting people cleared,” Leon said. “We have enough people. We need to address the security issues.”
A “short list” of current US Space Force system designations includes four “intelligence” systems not in the service’s FY2025 budget documentation: Stargate, Snowgate, Lightgate, and Shiloh.
In his October 25, 2024 message to the US Space Force, Chief of Space Operations General Chance Saltzman stated that he wants service members to help come up with memorable thematic names for a series of Space Force programs.
A subsequent memo from another senior service official included several already catchy names, which appear to refer to previously unpublished classified documents, whose nomenclature may hint at their purpose.
In “C-NOTE No. 32” from October 25, 2024, which Breaking Defense obtained, Saltzman clarified that the military service affirms its internal culture by naming equipment and weapon systems.
“Ultimately, words are just thoughts given form, so how we refer to something says a lot about how we think about it. Collectively, our shared language reflects our values, aspirations, and group norms—in other words, our culture,” Saltzman wrote in the memo, which was sent to all Guardians on duty.
The memorandum presented a list of ten Space Force activities for which Guardians are encouraged to propose themes by November 30, 2024, that will determine system names—from satellite communications to missile warning/tracking and “orbital warfare.”
In a follow-up memo published on October 28 and also obtained by Breaking Defense, Lieutenant General Shawn Bratton, Deputy Chief of Space Operations, Strategy, Plans, Programs, and Requirements, provides instructions for the naming process, noting that winning themes will be announced in December 2024.
The October 2024 designation list follows the expected structure. For example, the “Navigation Warfare (NAVWAR)” category includes all current versions of Global Positioning System (GPS) satellites, all designated “NM,” meaning “NAVWAR” and “medium Earth orbit.” Similarly, the “Surveillance” category includes the ground-based Cobra Dane radar, designated ST-108, where “ST” stands for “Surveillance” and “Terrestrial.”
Classified Space Programs
However, the list includes some surprises, such as the names of several “Cyber Warfare” and “Theater Electromagnetic Warfare” systems, referred to as “Red Dragon” and “Red Cloud,” respectively. These systems are absent from the Space Force’s FY2025 budget documentation, indicating that they are classified programs.
Perhaps most intriguing is the “intelligence” mission area, listed separately from “surveillance.” In military terms, intelligence typically refers to data collection to answer a specific military question or shorter-term tactical information-gathering missions, while surveillance implies long-term monitoring of a target area.
While the surveillance mission area includes current and developing Space Force radars, the intelligence mission area lists only four systems—all with intriguing code names that are again absent from the service’s FY2025 budget documents. Stargate, Snowgate, and Lightgate are likely related systems. The fourth is named Shiloh. For some reason, all four are designated ST, like the ground-based radars and telescopes in the surveillance mission area, rather than using the primary designation R for intelligence.
The Space Force did not respond to requests for comment on the listed intelligence systems at the time of publication. However, as Saltzman pointed out, the military prefers to categorize elements by name, so despite the absence of public information on these systems, one can draw some logical conclusions.
One plausible assumption is that the systems named “gate” represent stationary ground-based lasers used to track enemy satellites.
First, placing such classified sensors in a completely different category would be unusual, given that all known Space Force radars and telescopes fall under the surveillance category. Thus, it is reasonable to infer that the systems in the intelligence category are not radars or optical telescopes.
The second clue is that “light gates” are a type of sensor that uses an infrared transmitter and receiver to detect objects passing through a beam, measuring aspects such as timing, speed, acceleration, and duration.
The Starfire Optical Range at the Air Force Research Laboratory on Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico has long-housed telescopes capable of tracking satellites in low Earth orbit and specializes in experiments that have historically involved optical technologies for anti-satellite weaponry.
Kirtland is also home to the Space Rapid Capabilities Office, established by Congress in 2018 to receive urgent and largely classified requirements directly from US Space Command operators and quickly deliver capabilities.
Additionally, former Space Force Chief General Jay Raymond informed the House Armed Services Committee in 2021 that the service was developing directed-energy weapons to achieve space dominance, though he refrained from elaborating in an unclassified session.